One day after the legislature's summer stalemate, itâs hard to predict exactly where Pennsylvaniaâs great alcohol debate of 2013 goes, but it if you talk to the players one thing is clear: it certainly is not dead.

View full sizeLook for Pennsylvania's liquor reform debate to run on, perhaps through the rest of this year.

Hereâs a quick look at several factors that could affect the outcome.

1. Is there another shot of flexibility out there?

Someone, in the House or the Senate, is going to have to go a little further if the two sides are to get a bill to Gov. Tom Corbettâs desk.

When there was still a chance to run a bill this weekend, according to sources close to the negotiations, House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny County, wanted the Senate to come closer to him on divesting the stateâs wholesale liquor business.

The Senate package, at present, opens the door to a possible lease of the wholesale system to a private manager, if it is determined that such a shift would have a positive impact on the state's bottom line.

Turzai was not available for comment for this story.

The Senate, according to those same sources, didnât want to and probably couldn't budge from its plan, with Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, R-Delaware County, having just moved heaven and earth to collect their votes.

But sometime, somethingâs got to give if the GOP lawmakers in both are to bring this legislative trophy home.

2. The transportation funding factor.

Another reason the Senate held its liquor bill back Sunday was, of course, to ensure that the House would be committed to a serious transportation funding package.

It's not exactly clear how the two issues became so inextricably linked.

Lt. Gov. Jim Cawley described it Sunday as having happened "organically," through a convergence of end-of-session timing and Senate leaders' belief that getting serious on the issue would be the best way to get positive action in the House.

Sen. Robert "Tommy" Tomlinson, R-Bucks, said Monday that the best way to uncouple the issues now is simple: do transportation first.

"I don't want to see a bridge fail or a bus line closed because we didn't come to an agreement over whether someone can get a six-pack at a Sheetz or a Wawa," Tomlinson said, who noted businesses throughout his district rely on public transit moving workers in and out of Philadelphia.

"It's not a sensible trade-off."

Many observers say this linkage may be the biggest hurdle, because at the moment it is hard to see how the House GOP â filled with dozens of 'no' voters for fuel tax increases - can move a bigger transportation package without major Democratic support.

And, will the Senate ever get to a position where it would take up the liquor bill without transportation completed?

There may be one way...

3. Could the House Democrats overplay their hand?

Some lobbyists on this issue believe if the Senate Republicans ever get to the point where they are convinced that House Democrats are not negotiating in good faith on transportation funding, they could regroup and send their liquor bill to the House.

They haven't reached that point yet, the sources say, in part because the bipartisan desire for a transportation package in the Senate is so much closer to what the House Democrats are demanding than what the House Republicans have struggled to offer.

But If Turzai and Corbett decide to move the dial up on transportation spending this summer, and get closer to the $2.5 billion per year that the Senate passed, that calculus could be different.

But, see #2, that would be a tough sell in the House Republican caucus right now.

4. The return of modernization?

Wendell Young IV, president of the union that represents state store workers, won some time this weekend, but that's about it. For the first time in decades , his union and its allies find themselves in the position of having to win back legislative votes to carry the day.

Young said Monday he will try to do that by trying to change the conversation this summer to the benefits of modernizing the current state store system through legislation permitting more Sunday sales hours, more stores-within-a-store in groceries and the like.

He'd like to see the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board be able get into the mail-order business with sales to shoppers in other states, where permitted by law, and said he could support letting restaurants make limited take-home sales of wine to their dining customers.

And Young also wants Pennsylvania to look into becoming a contractor for other states' wholesale operations, where applicable, arguing it could save Pennsylvania money even more on the pricing end, thereby enhancing profits.

Young is confident if those steps are taken to improve customer convenience in the current system, "consumers won't want to get rid of it."

Question is, can he find enough champions in the Senate GOP to make those things happen? In the House, Turzai is a staunch believer in getting the state completely out of the business, so it's unlikely for Young to start his pitch there.

Look for Young to make direct appeals to Pileggi and Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson County, both of whom started this debate more in the modernization camp, to see if he can interest them in a reset.

5. Can the Second Act be better than the First?

Don't necessarily buy into conventional wisdom that controversial issues get one shot per legislative session.

While that can be the case on issues driven primarily by members of one caucus or one party, it's pretty clear that Republican support can be rallied across the Capitol now for some form of liquor reforms.

And, as one lobbyist supportive of the privatization cause noted, liquor didn't fail this week, it simply ran into a traffic jam.

"Nobody's walking away that I saw saying this thing is dead," said Sen. Charles McIlhinney, R-Bucks County, and the Senate Republican key drafter on the issue.

Nor does it matter, some of those closest to the issue said, that it is now operating without the leverage of the state budget.

With the issues that separate the chambers identified and the legislative stage relatively clear for several months to massage them, "now we can spend the summer developing them and dealing with them," said Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery County.

It's a question of whether there is enough of a passion on the issue to hammer the details into place.

So the summer and fall loom large on this issue.

David Thomas, chief counsel to House Speaker Sam Smith, R-Jefferson County, said mid-December will be a good time to check back. "It's an artificial deadline," Thomas noted, "but one that creates a lot of momentum to get issues done that become more difficult to work on in an election year."

Featured Story

Get 'Today's Front Page' in your inbox

This newsletter is sent every morning at 6 a.m. and includes the morning's top stories, a full list of obituaries, links to comics and puzzles and the most recent news, sports and entertainment headlines.

optionalCheck here if you do not want to receive additional email offers and information.See our privacy policy

Thank you for signing up for 'Today's Front Page'

To view and subscribe to any of our other newsletters, please click here.